Help, please

  • Thread starter Thread starter TristanCross
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Another example of twisting what the Catholic Church teaches and believes.

The Early Church Fathers are a good source of information on what was happening in the Early Church. We know from the New Testament that disagreements with the teachings of the Apostles arose from the very beginning. St. Paul warns against this, we read of the false teachings of the Judaizers, among others who teach other teachings that contradict the Apostles.

The Catholic Church has not ever claimed that the Fathers had the charism (gift) or being infallible. Even the Pope himself is not held to be infallible in day to day actions and decisions. That would be a fallacy that Protestants like Jason would like us to think that because one or the other Fathers did not always know the Catholic answer, or held a position that was not accepted by those holding the Apostolic faith, that they cannot be a good source of information on the Early Church. It is rather the opposite of the assertions that Jason makes, which is the objections to what the Catholic Church teaches prove that the Catholic Church cannot be the repository of the Truth, but rather it shows that when questions came up and disagreements arose that threatened to rip the Church apart, that same Church followed the example of the Apostles, who met in Council in Jerusalem, and guided by the Holy Ghost, decided issues that needed to be defined.

Fathers like Tertulian who were excommunicated are still valid sources to understand both the unity, and how one can by rejecting union with the Church, and wandering into a stance where one’s personal opinions are more valid than the teaching authority of the Church, are a good lession for all of us.

As an aside, the term Roman Catholic has only been around for the past two hundred or so years. It was applied to the Catholic Church by Protestants as an affront and attack on the Church. In doing so, they tried to deny history and claim that the Pope was just a local bishop, and that all bishops being equal, they could claim an authority equal to his. Prior to this anyone who spoke of the Catholic Church took it for granted that the Catholic Church was either all those Churches (Eastern and Western) who were in communion with the Pope. Some Orthodox included it as a part of their definition of the Orthodox Churches, not in union with the Pope.
 
And he also says, in his ‘How to Read This’ part of the site, ‘refute this, but don’t’… he puts forth certain rules that are unreasonable. I cannot use other quotes of the Father? I cannot say that it is because it is not been made dogmatic yet? And on top of the fact that he acts like they are the ultimate rule of our faith, it becomes unreasonable. Nonetheless, I will see what I can do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top